[License-review] Request for Approval of Universal Permissive License (UPL)

[Gervase Markham]

On 16/04/14 09:13, Jim Wright wrote:
> If so (and assuming we could agree what changes confer GPL
> compatibility,

Not necessary - just state that you allow use in GPLv2 software, and
then you will have given whatever permissions are necessary, whatever
the specific incompatibility concerns of any party.

> and don't want to combine with *other* copyleft
> licenses or could review each for this purpose and arrange
> compatibility with those as well,

GPLv2 is the only copyleft license with which Apache is inconveniently
incompatible.

> and get the change OSI approved to
> make it usable on forges that require this... :)

Not necessary, if one holds that adding additional permissions to a
permissive license should not affect its OSI-approval status.

> this still wouldn't
> extend the patent license to the work being contributed to, only the
> contributions, plus the other differences you noted - i.e., that is
> still a materially different scope than the license in the UPL IMHO.

Sure. I think we all understand that the patent scope is very different.

Gerv